I disagree because: 1. Your summary of what the article "boils down to" includes this: "The general consensus is that the reason the market is down is BECAUSE

I disagree because: 1. Your summary of what the article "boils down to" includes this: "The general consensus is that the reason the market is down is BECAUSE of Obama's bill". There is no such thing in the article. 2. The article suggests reasons to think that the reason why the market is down is not "BECAUSE of Obama's bill". You neither mention these reason nor offer any objections to them. (The reasons are: (a) the market is noisy enough that typically day-to-day movements are mostly noise; (b) there is another good explanation for the market drop, namely China's recent doings.) 3. Your summary of the article includes this: "the WSJ is are a bunch of no-good right-wing authoritarian fascists, and I'm going to stick my fingers in my ears and pretend that they don't exist". The actual article's complaints about the WSJ's politics don't include anything about authoritarianism or fascism, and the author says not that he's going to pretend they don't exist but that he's not going to take them so seriously any more. 4. You offer no evidence of the alleged consensus, no indication of whose consensus it is, and no reason to think that the alleged consensus is correct.